[awm]

The actual partner hand is quite unlucky. If partner had as little as xxx - Kxxxxxx xxx you have quite decent play for game (even better if partner has singleton heart instead of void). Even the actual hand has a bit of play (stiff DK with hearts breaking? Maybe opponents lead a stiff small diamond hoping to ruff?)

[Phil]

I guess the recommended strategy on this hand is to bid a forcing 3♥ and hope partner violates system and passes!

[Cyberyeti]

Bbradley62, on 2012-November-26, 11:01, said:

---

"We don't make anything" is not the same as "nothing works". Since we haven't seen the opponents' hands, we don't know what scoring opportunity they may or may not have missed. North looks like a crystal-clear w vs r 3♦ opener to me.

I'd bid 3♥ (4♥ is kickback, 3 then 4 is a 4♥ bid), partner's 3♠ or 3N would make me think, and 3N is not actually a bad contract in the real world although terrible on paper.

[jillybean]

jeffford76, on 2012-November-26, 10:41, said:

Yes, it is legal, but I'm not sure that doing it in the way you suggest is right. I think it's right to preempt more aggressively against the strong players. They are more likely to get to the right spot if given a free run, and you frequently are on track to win the board against weak players anyway.

Yes, you are right. I had that completely around the wrong way.

[broze]

Cyberyeti, on 2012-November-26, 11:45, said:

I'd bid 3♥ (4♥ is kickback, 3 then 4 is a 4♥ bid)

This is what I was referring to above in my post. This is the way I play it but is it usual or even best? I'd quite like to just bid 4♥ on this hand. I imagine many expert kickback pairs switch to 4♣ keycard here.

[ArtK78]

With my regular partner, 4 of the other minor is kickback and a jump to 4 of a major is an asking bid in that major. To get to game in a major, one must bid the major at the 3 level (forcing) and then bid 4 of the major.

So this is a non-issue.

The other point raised is whether it is legal to vary your preempting style against stronger opposition. I don't believe that you can have a partnership agreement to vary your style against different partnerships (anymore than you can choose to play 2/1 against some partnerships and Precision against others), whether it is based on specific individuals or a class of individuals (stronger opposition). However, if you choose to make more aggressive preempts against stronger opposition but have not discussed this with your partner, it is OK. Of course, once this has occurred once or twice it may become a de facto partnership agreement.